Skip to main content

About your Search

20121129
20121207
STATION
FBC 53
MSNBCW 35
CNNW 4
KGO (ABC) 3
MSNBC 2
KPIX (CBS) 1
WBAL (NBC) 1
WJLA (ABC) 1
WMAR (ABC) 1
WRC (NBC) 1
LANGUAGE
English 135
Search Results 0 to 49 of about 135 (some duplicates have been removed)
. that is why most everyone that we need government to set limits. not bacteria chemicals. to make sure food companies tell you what is in their food and how fattening it is. state legislator felix ortiz has done that in new york city. he got trans fat man, calorie counts posted at mcdonald's and other fast-food places. now he wants a ban on adding too much salt. so you think he saved lives? >> absolutely. john: okay. a farmer. he grows vegetables dollar raises cows, chickens, and pigs. i assume you want the people who buy your beef and pork to be safe. so don't we owe him a vote of thanks for saving this? >> no. i would say you're killing me out here. trying to get my stuff to market. this plethora of government regulations, you know, is killing our farm and our ability to come to market. john: you are just a greedy businessman and don't care if people died. let's go through some of the ways that assemblyman ortiz has saved the chance that band. >> that is old news. john: you wann a tax on junk food. >> the carbohydrate product that is in the market. we are giving the consumer is the choice
of this government, geronimo. and carol says sandra on the cover of time magazine, but it more own a gun. was it could? to like this? that is our show tonight. [applause] >> and now john stossel. john: food can kill. people will eat the wrong stuff may get sick. it's while most everyone says we need government toet some limits. make sure there is not bacteria in your food or dangerous chemicals. to make sure food companies tell you what is in their food and how fattening it is. state legislator felix ortiz ha done that in new york city. he got trans fat man, calorie counts posted at mcdonald's and other fast-food places now he wants a ban on adding too much salt. so ou think he saved lives? >> absolutely. john: okay. a farmer. he grows vegetables dollar raises cows, chickens, and pigs. i assume you want the people who buy your beef and pork to be safe. so don't we owe him a vote of thanks for saving this? >> no. i would say you're killing me out here. trying to get my stuff to market. this plethora of government regulations, you know, is killing our farm and our ability to come to rket.
need the government to set limits make sure there's no bacteria in your food or dangerous chemicals to make sure food companies tell you what is in the food and how fattening it is. felix ortiz has done that in new york city. he got calorie counts posted at mcdonald and other fast food places. now he wants a ban on adding too much salt. so representative ortiz you think you have saved lives because of these things? >> absolutely. >> joe is a farmer he grows vegetables also raises cows, chickens and pigs. i assume you want the people who buy your beef and pork to be safe. don't we owe him a vote of thanks for saving us? >> no actually. i would say you are killing me out here. um prying to get my food to market and this plethora of government regulations is killing our farm and the ability to come to market. >> you are a greedy businessman don't care if people die. let's see ow lives saved because of the ban on trans fat? that is old news. how about you want a tax on junk food. >> we have it built to make sure many money so that the carbohydrate products in the market. we are giving t
book. the bottom line is that we are mostly safe because of markets. not because of government. companies were carved by bacteria simply to protect their brand. competition, device the pipes are reputation, it protects us much better than government over well. that is our show. i am john stossel, thank you for watching. secret [laughter] melissa: here comes gerri willis. ♪ ♪ gerri: tonight a warm and likable a. what they say could damage your car and the triple a agency. welcome to "the willis report." senator kay bailey hutchison and sarah gerri: hello, everyone. speaker john boehner and nancy pelosi threatened over the president had to go over the president had her go. we have two guests. welcome to you both. last night, we covered the details of the president's opening gambit in the fiscal cliff talk. he wants a $1.6 trillion tax increase, 50 billion and stimulus spending. and the white house has the ability to raise the debt ceiling without congressional approval. a very big deal for folks there. today, the president is out there, trying to drum up support among the pub
. the government has let small business owners feeling forgotten. one is here with her story. and your shopping questions answered. consumer reports' annual money in nuys list. welcome to "the willis report." ♪ gerri: hello, everybody. i'm gerri willis. a bold counter offer to president obama on the fiscal clef. the new plan contains 800 billion in new taxes, half of what the president was looking for. more importantly, the gop plan keep tax rates the way they are now. we know that is a deal maker for the tie-breaker for the presidents. joining me now, the man some democrats blame for the fiscal cliff impasse, grover norquist, president of americans for tax reform. and the many and as a finger to about fixing it, michael reagan, founder of the reagan group. i want to start with the republicans plan that they put on the table. they have been accused of doing nothing and all. they come up with their own plan which includes 800 billion in revenue from closing loopholes and eliminating deductions and then 1 billion in spending cuts. it is being rejected from the get go by democrats. grover, what
of talking about what the government is doing that shouldn't be doing. >> that is right. mark is a smart guy and i agree with him. the spending issue, we simply cannot rein in while we are focusing on taxes. you shall howl nonserious the president is. he sent timothy geithner on a fools errand. he said he wants a balanced approach. but the balance is that republicans come up with everything, and he is allowed kharv on the debt limit. it is hard to understand what the balances of the equation, besides allowing h to retain his approach, which is continuing to spend and rack up massive deficits and continuing higher taxes without any plan that bears that out. remember that his budgethikes taxes and still spends $47 trillion over the next 10 years. gerri: to that point, you look at the approval rating now going down for the first time since the election at 49%. i think it tells you something. maybe american people are looking at this and it looks a whole lot like campaigning to me. it is like the election never happen. we are still campaigning on the campaign trail. today in pennsylvania, talkin
and see what happened with the bankruptcy when the federal government got involved. the cfo lost their jobs from the board of directors lost their jobs, and there are restrictions to the money coming in. so the federal government. the city of detroit knows what the problems are. the question is do we have the political will to make the difficult decision. gerri: that is where i want to go next. the track record here -- the track record here is not good. we have years of overspending. it is incredibly embarrassing stories, the previous mayor usinggan airplane at his own leisure to do personal travel. we have just a terrible financial track record. per capita income at 25,000 below the u.s. average. detroit employment is 18%, almost 19%. does the city council -- does the city management have it under control? have you guys just lost control? >> we certainly have it lost control. we have it under control. but we have our issues. but we are not falling off into the detroit river. the community is doing well. the business community, the corporate community and the city of detroit. we
the speaker makes a mistake and the tea party is not a group that embraces serious tangible of government that is traditionally work in this country. there are members of congress who got elected because, in fact, the tea party activists across the country were involved in the election. the tea partiers and outsiders -- i would remind john boehner that there was a time when he was the outsider that was an annoyance to the party leadership. i understand the speaker being annoyed when he has people within his caucus that are committed to a set of principles that they make it hard for him to make easy deals. but i would also remind him that people are not going to forsake their principles for something thats as insignificant and their life as a committee assignment remark that is right. >> if he thinks this is a party discipline, he is sadly mistaken. he often knows that from his own experience as a younger time in his service in congress. charles: representative, it has been set from the beginning that the tea pay not only poses an incredible threat to the senate democrats, but to establish
. if there is ever a good reason for government spending, this is it. let me tell you something, if congress in the budget crisis doesn't raise taxes and doesn't include meaningful spending cuts. i will be furious. if there is every reason for a safety net this truly is. >> california is portrait in miniature why tax-and-spend does not work. if tax and spend policies were the way to go california's unemployment rate would not be north of 10%. the staggering statistic here, neil, 35% of the two million unemployed in california have been unemployed for 52 weeks or longer. that tells you they have not been out there actively searching. once you factor -- >> there are no jobs. >> i get it. because of the state policies as well. once you factor them into the unemployment rate you can bet the rate in california would ratchet up to 12%. >> emac you're one of my best friends here, here's the thing. in california about a million people took advantage of that unemployment extension. in the entire country, barely 100,000 new jobs created every month for at least last couple years. there are no jobs to
of every race, creed and religion is an insat i can't believe government spending machine. they are not tackling so much what we heard in the campaign. i believe that political venge is a terrible way to leave the country and good policy and setting goals and taking bold action. anyone elected to office has a responsibility to weigh the evidence and we must hold them to the standard worthy of their office. in 2004, it was the democrats that wrung their hands. george bush had won reelection with a higher popular vote . increased republican majority in the house and senate. first time a president did that since fdr. yet the democrats won the house in 2006, presidency and house and senate in 2008. there are wild swings from one election to the next and will be again. so don't go wobbly instead go boldly forward to explain why you are right. because i believe you are. [ applause ] all right. instead of working with congress face to face to save the economy. president obama is trying to gets had way by doing what he does best. campaigning and making speeches about the fiscal cl
it grow even faster than that in order to enable bigger government. 100% of our fiscal problem is on the spending side. obama is being very inflexible on that. republicans i'm afraid will get taken to the cleaners just what happened in 1990 when read my lips. melissa: would you rather we went over the fiscal cliff? >> compared to what obama's talking about, the fiscal cliff might be better because obama not only wants soak the rich tax increases that would automatically happen, he then wants additional taxes on top of that would be very bad for american competitiveness. we don't want to send jobs to china and india but almost as if obama wants to do that. at least if we went over the cliff, we would get the sequester, which is the budget wonk term for automatic reductions in the growth of spending. melissa: absolutely but i'm not sure republicans are giving in as much as you think. if you drill down on the details, as soon as i saw 800 billion in new tax revenue, my immediate question did they give on the point of marginal rates and from the language it doesn't look like. more
the government, that creates a backlash and they go up. i wonder if that's how you think about it or that's how the hisry played out. >> what impresses me is americans have been more open to revenue raising and tax increases. the period i study is the post war period in the united states, between the '40s and '70s. states were facing fiscal pressures. they raised taxes. this is republican governors and lawmakers, democratic governors and lawmakers. they found that individuals, you know, the voters, the taxpayers were willing to retain those taxes when put on the ballot. there's an equilibrium, you can go too far either direction. americans are actually quite happy with using revenue to solve the budget impasses. i think we have gotten out of practice, politicians in particular. >> can i add something? it's an interesting point, then at the federal level, what's fascinating is it did you want matter how high top marginal race has been in the last 50 years or 60 years. the ability of the federal government to actually collect more revenue as a share of gdp has been fairly constant. so there's thi
: the syrian government confirming it's getting its chemical weapons ready and may use it. the assad regime prepared the nerve gas sarin and loaded it. martha: i'm martha maccallum. president obama is warning assad that the whole world is watching his actions very closely, and if he were to use chemical weapons on his own people, it would clearly have large consequences for him. bill: secretary of state hillary clinton called an emergency meeting with the pentagon. >> the pentagon has contingency plans for everything including the chemical attack. it's believed according to a u.s. source that syria has put this sarin fast into cannisters that could be dropped from planes. these cannisters are designed to fracture so the devastating nerve gas could escape. but it's not known whether syria intends to use those chemical weapons. we think we have it in aerosol form. the u.s. is making contingency plans in case bashar al-asaad leaves the country suddenly and flees somewhere for asylum which would leave a vacuum there. several countries in that region are trying to find a place for assad to go. s
by the difficulties put forth by government spending at the rates that they have been. so when it comes to the fiscal cliff, our young voters more than ever want to make sure that our republicans and our candidates that are putting forth the message of working together to get this problem solved. i think whether you look at this simpson bowles plan or other things, we need to make sure we're work together and putting these important issues forth. >> rick: let's talk about entitlement reform. that's another topic that's very important for republicans and they have said that the leadership in washington, they want to hear the president. they want to hear democrats talk about entitlement reform. are young republicans in favor of a partial or whole privatization of our entitlement program? would young republicans be open to the idea of privatizing social security and things like that? >> our republicans on campus have traditionally expressed support for cutting spending. they can see that the current climate that we're in of overspending and simply not having enough revenue and increasing our deficit is
the tax burden that americans are paying to the federal government. given that, do you support the proposal put forward by john boehner? >> well, because the proposal is significantly amorphous, you could get those revenues through economic growth and we don't really have things nailed down, i don't want to talk about a hypothetical, but there is a danger that when you put revenues on the table, even revenues through economic growth, if you grew at 4% a year, reagan levels, instead of 2%, french levels or obama levels, you would net $5 trillion in additional revenue to the government, you could pay down all of obama's additional debt by higher levels of growth, not raising taxes. so there's a lot of money to be gotten from growth. how they do this, we have to see it written down, but because the obama administration and spokesmen have been so emphatic about all taxes and no spending restraint, all taxes and actually spend -- another stimulus, another solyndra stimulus program -- >> i don't think they've mentioned solyndra, grover, but i'm sure they appreciate your mentioning of
to be done. judging from the back slapping help politicians, the government is still the one to do it but is it? think about it. if the road to virtue were paved with billion dollar bills then everyone in washington would be the pope, news flash, they are not, they are not good as getting bang for their buck. think of all those gas taxes that were to pay for those bridges, or tolls of no bridges to pay for fixing those bridges, and highways. think about that social security lockbox. no box, no lock. and millions in lottery ticket to go to education to make our kids smarter, today, sadly, they are only getting dumber. while we open our hearts let's not lose our minds. the folks deserve better to be locked out of a lockbox, and to be taken by greedy politicians who find other uses on the backs of that. not fair, not right. not remotely the thing to do. to staten islander john d'backo who knows of what i speak. he took matters in his own hand with his brother and buddies, made things right, here is john on the phone with the story. you quickly seize the initiative and did a lot more o
gets automatic tax increases from everybody, more government money from the private sector. he gets big cuts in the military, which he also wants. and if anything goes wrong, he blames the republicans. i don't think he cares. either way from his perspective he's a winner. if he was looking for a deal, he would be dealing. he's not dealing. he's campaigning. stuart: you say if we go over the cliff, he wins. if we go with his plan, he wins. no way he loses on this situation. liz: fiscal cliff diving at the 11th hour -- i hate the cliches, i'm tired of them but we will see an 11th hour deal on december 24th, christmas eve or new year's eve in the dead of night. i'm worried about that. a very bad deal no one will have read. stuart: i think there might be a deal at the very last minute in which the republicans say okay higher tax rates on people making more than a half million and we'll talk about spending cuts at some point in the future. david: i think there's a 50/50 chance there won't be a deal. stuart: that's why the dow industrials are doing nothing because nobody knows what's going to
they are probably pretty evenly divided between republicans and democrats and the big message on government spending has been distorted because we've had a crazy recession. i want to bring in anna because the president built that winning location of african-americans, latinos and women. it's a gone primarily of rich white man. why not let the tax cuts expire for the top 2% of earners and then people in the middle can say, this party is not a party of white men who care about rich people. >> christine, i think it's to the benefit of both sides for the fiscal cliff to be solved, and i think both barack obama, president obama and the republican congress, have to be into legacy-building. president obama is into building a legacy and solving the problems and also the republican congress now has to be about diversity and be part of the solution. part of the problem that we had in this campaign is that we were running, we had a candidate that was running against barack obama, but that was not as good in articulating his own vision and showing what he stood for. we can't just be against something. we have t
to the government to feed the beast that keeps spending and spending our money. they're allowed to hang onto a small portion of their profits. >> yeah. that is actually not really accurate. there have been numbers of studies, most recently from the organisation for economic co-operation and development but also last year we saw a bill proposed in congress from senator sanders and representative ellison, all of which identify over $10 billion annually that are going to the fossil fuel industry in subsidies. i'm a father too. melissa: congress doesn't have any money. they don't have money to give. the money they have have is my money that they have taken from me. it is company's money they have paid in. it is tax revenue. >> it is our money. melissa: hanging on to earnings, these are deductions rather than sending in even more tax dollars they're paying less tax based on investments they're making. you're calling those things subsidies. that is not congress's money. that is exxon's money it is hanging on to. but they're not taking money back. they're hanging onto the money they have earned. do you und
with this. this is all about, all about trying to preserve medicare. so the government in this case is unusually probably trying to do the right thing. i don't know everything about it yet because it is still a little furry around the edges. but aarp jumped on this. this is not good for members. the premiums. will go down. melissa: if it went through it could be good for the members in the sense that medigap premiums would go down. >> exactly. melissa: that is something their members would really like. but once again they would not. this is the big sticking point that happens again and again. >> right. melissa: you think aarp is out there because you're a senior lobbying in your best interest. meanwhile on their website, call your congressman, do this, do that e-mails. you could be following their lead and doing things actually against your best interest. >> yeah. the problem if you don't really pay attention to what they're doing they mask it so beautifully. they really do, a good job. i watch their commercials all day long. always sounds like they're advocating for their seniors.
, creed and religion is an insatiable government spending machine whose leaders aren't tack-- and the leaders aren't tackling the hard truth that we heard so much about in the campaign. i believe that political revenge is a terrible way to lead the country. good policy is made by dealing in fact, setting goals, and taking gold action. anyone elected to office has a way to weigh the evidence and explain the votes and hold them to the standard worthy of their offices. remember n2004, the democrats were wringing their hands and george w. bush won with a higher popular vote total than in 2000 and he had increased the republican majorities in the house, and the senate. the first time a president had done that since fdr. and yet, the democrats came back to win the house in 2006. the presidency, the house and the senate in 2008. and there have been wild swings from one election to the next and there will be again, but don't go wobbly now, instead, go boldly forward to explain why you are right because i believe you are (applause) >> thanks, all right. instead of working with congr
american citizen living abroad, track him down in that other country and then for the u.s. government to kill him with a missile in that other country? the man's father went to court in advance of our government doing that to try to stop the u.s. government from doing it. the father sued to say in advance that his son should be arrested instead of killed on the spot if he was found, but he was found and he was just killed on the spot with a missile. u.s. citizen. then a month later, we killed his 16-year-old son, too. also an american citizen. same cause of death. we have done things in the past decade or so that if you asked anybody in advance of us starting to behave this way, whether the united states of america would ever be a country that behaved this way, there's no way you could have convinced anyone. we granted ourselves position to act this way when we set our response to being the victim of a massive terrorist attack in 2001 was going to be that we were going to declare we were at war. congress passed an authorization of military force against the group that attacked us and
revenue for the government. >> well, a lot of people worry about the many years that japan has been in a slow growth environment, but they've kept interest rates very low in japan, but the problem is, government is too big. that's why japan has not been able to start growing again. and this is the path that the u.s. is certainly on if we don't change that dynamic. >> paul: kim, is there any recognition about this in washington or is it all -- i mean, do you hear any of this discussion or do they really believe, certainly, the white house and the treasury, that tax rates like this don't matter, at that ultimately-- >> no, they do to a degree. if you talk to the officials iran up, come on, so we're going to raise the rates, what is fascinating to put it in the bigger context of the debate about tax revenue, the economists have the static view, you've got x-amounts of capital gains income and you get 20% more tax revenue. >> you don't, because people decide to shelter it. they do their transactions the year before, when the amount is less. and so, all of these numbers that the white ho
out of denmark. >> i mean, in the sense of the new government cut off my funding. stuart: because of your position on global warming and environmentalism. >> yes we don't want to it hear good advice. stuart: what's your advice on the carbon tax, if we got one, would it help reduce co 2 emissions? >> well, any climate economist would say a low carbon tax makes sense, but the problem is, it will only cut a very tiny amount and of course, what you really have to remember, you're never going to get china or india on board. so essentially, it's going to have a very, very small effect. it's not the solution to climate change. >> would you say that the co 2 emissions are causing temperatures globally to rise. >> yes. >> and that's accurate? >> and in the long run, we do need to cut back on carbon emissions, but the way that we're trying right now, the way that we're trying in doha and many international areas is not working and we're essentially making up these promises, but what are we doing? we're sending productions to china and india, so essentially we're putting out more co 2, but n
bigger government. republicans said no. harry reid has had a hissy fit for four years now, i'm happy the republicans would not raise taxes to pay for is bigger government. the problem is the american people don't want their taxes raised. lou: what i asked was how you feel? >> i am pleased as punch. harry reid, at having a hissy fit at me, he's really mad at the american people for not wanting to raise taxes. he personalizes it with me. lou: what about those folks like senator john mccain, senator lindsay gramm, senator chambliss the list goes on. i mean -- >> it doesn't go on. it does not go on. here's the good news. all the people who last week and said we might raise taxes under certain circumstances with the same people who said that two years ago. and every news media outlet in the country has said the last week, would you like to be famous? would you like to be called important and influential? come to our tv station and announced you areefor tax increases and we will tell everyone you are important and influential. they have had no takers, for crying out loud. all of the guys f
the bottom line is that we are mostly safe because of markets. not because of government. companies were carved by bacteria simply to protect their brand. competition, device the pipes are reputation, it protects us much better than government over well. that is our show. i am john stossel, thank you for watching. [applause]hour lou: good evening, everybody. a lot has changed in the last 2f hours. to balance the republican author of tax revenue increases. president obama, maintaining a highly believable effort of the white house and congress to resolve differences that would avoid the fiscal cliff. that is $1.2 trillion in automatic budget cuts and $600 billion in tax hikes that would result from the expiratin on december 31, te consequences would simply be devasting. the economic impact on the country and the american people would mean the loss of hundreds of thousands, if not millions of jobs. e very likely onset of yet another recession. the white house timothy geithner on capitol hill today. he went there empty-handed to meet the party leaders. house speaker john boehner who has
the syrian government uses often to describe the rebels fighting against the government which is killing its own people. activists say the government has killed more than 40,000 people, or at least 40,000 have died in the civil war which broke out well more than a year ago. we have team fox coverage. now to the state department with reaction from the united states and nato. first to the chief fox correspondent at the united nations this afternoon. it seems there is a battle for a capital city that could be shaping up and that is crucially important. >>jonathan: yes. there is no doubt we have entered a new and very significant stage in the battle for syria and that is in essence of battle for the capital of damascus which has been going on for five or six days. president bashar al-assad wants do and indeed has to hang on to the capital if he is to stay in power. there are many experts who believe either way, he has decided to fight to the death. either if he tries to flow he will be killed by his own supporters who will feel betrayed him him or ultimately he will be killed by the rebels. this
of the president's promised balanced approach. you know, where is he going to start restrained growth in government? we're open to working with anybody who's willing to acknowledge the problem. >> greta: who's going to blink first? >> first of all, let me tell you where you should get revenue. >> greta: okay. >> by growing the economy. just a couple numbers. already in this meager economic recovery, we've increased revenue to the federal government by $344 billion. if we just return to a normal economy, like we had in 2007, under president bush, where proven was 18.5% of our economy, that would raise another $400 billion per year. the president's proposal right now, the highest estimated is $75 billion, a tenth of that. economic growth is 10 finals more effective at raising revenue. the problem with punishing success, the problem with the president's proposal, it will put that economic growth at risk. you know, i think the best question really is, what is the president's plan? show us your plan. this is about returning confidence to the economy. >> greta: a plan to rev up the economy or a plan for
by the government. i don't know anyone who would ever believe such a promise. i don't expect that the republicans would accept that offer from the president. i just don't see that as ever happening in the city. let me ask you -- >> i'm sorry. republicans basically have to say our principles here are correct. our whole analysis of the economy is correct. we need massive spending decreases, and they've got to stick with that. if they can get decent spending increases and have to agree to additional revenue, fine. if they get pushed in the position the president is trying to push them, they stick with their principles, you know, and a year and a half from now go to the electorate with that. it worked in 10. it will probably work in 14. it will be a shame because it will do a lot of damage to our economy in between, but the president has that really on his shoulders. he's the leader. >> greta: mayor, thank you, sir. >> thank you. >> greta: breaking news out of syria. the syrian government mixing components for the deadly sarin nerve gas. the ranking democrat on the house intelligence committee joins
that --. melissa: why is that, to raise that much revenue and give it to the government? i don't understand why that is appealing? >> it is not appealing to me. melissa: okay. >> it would be ap peeling from a math perspective because the number is bigger. but the problem is, the number won't be that big no matter what happens. you can talk about dynamic scoring. look at different ways revenue won't be revenue it is projected to be. you're talking about something that would do tremendous damage to the domestic economy. everybody agrees with this. president obama as president at least twice made the argument, raising taxes including raising taxes just on the wealthy would hurt the economy. he is doing something he previously said would hurt the economy. melissa: that is absolutely true but please,,guys, show me that full screen another time. on the spending side of the ledger none of those cuts are big enough to make any kind of a difference, whether we're talking about going over the cliff or talking about even the gop plan. if you keep in mind we're spending $4 billion a day that we currently h
on the ads, making shut down the government, make them look bad, recreate 1995 which i participated in. you make it look bad and you get a shot to take back the house and create american public opinion to work for you. >> and the country goes bankrupt thank you for being honest. >> i'm not writing policy, nor am i policy person, but i do understand. this is an attempt under this president to ensure that the republicans look as bad as they have never looked. lou: the republicans, this is a direct attack. and to elements of the dna of the republican party. one is low taxes and secondly, it is a sense of fiscal prudence and responsibility. if they play it is entirely wrong they could have both of those elements of their dna strips from them. >> that is right. the thing i worry about is the republicans seem to negotiates themselves. they blew an opportunity to frame this issue to the american people. when you had the senate minority leader, and laugh when he heard about the proposal, if i were him i would have come out and said, you know what, this administration wants to usurp the constitttion
't respond to, this party that has paraded around, the party that wants to rein in government spending, they are unable to identify any changes in medicare or entitlement spending which shows the tea party at its core was a phoney, phoney movement. >> joy, it's interesting to hear ron referring to august 2011 because a number of refers appear to have forgotten something happened in november 2012 called a presidential election. >> right. it was an election in which president obama, unprecedented for a democrat, actually ran on a platform of raising taxes. he said, i'm going to raise taxes on the top 2% and he was re-elected resoundingly with it. to what ron said, if it's only $14 trillion, what's the big deal, go ahead and let the rich pay it? that's number one. number two, the other thing that's been exposed and what's true, what's always been true about conservativism is that the core principle is the rich don't pay too much, they pay too little. when they say things like broaden the tax base, they think it's a moral hazard to have a progressive tax code. you want a flatter tax code f
government. merry christmas, government. you are not the real savior. the reverend joins us live this christmas season. >> brian: super storm sandy couldn't wipe out his home but something else did. >> she said to me. are you sure your house is gone. you misplace a pen and pencil but not a house. >> gretchen: how the entire house vanished."fox and friendst now. ♪ ♪ "fox and friends". >> steve: a house is something that is not easy to misplace. if you leave it there, you come back and it is there. >> gretchen: you hope that happens. we'll fill you in on the details. in the meantime what happen in a phone call. a lot can happen, right. you can get in fights and agreements and compromise. hum, i am not so sure that happened in the phone call between speaker of the house john boehner and president of the united states, barack obama. did they come to a conclusion. it is now the president's turn. >> brian: it is a week since the president and speaker talked. i do not know at of this moment who called who. >> steve: we know no details. >> brian: it is good there is no details. i jus
, and like to. the government takes, and attorneys say what to do to avoid it. first, christmas music from mark stein, i don't know why my picture is up there. that's mark stein and he's singing, not me. ♪ male announcer ] at scottrade, you won't just find us online you'll also find us in person, with dedicated support teams at over 500 brancs nationwide. so when you call or visit, you can ask for a name you know. because personal service startwith a real person. [ rodger ] at scottrade, seven dollar trades are just the start. our support teams are nearby, ready to help. it's no wonder so many investors are saying... [ all ] i'm with scottrade. >> detroit, we're told, is on the verge of bankruptcy, but one member of the city council thinks the president should step in and lend a hand, otherwise known as a bailout. yeah, let's call it what it is, a bailout, a call for a bailout from the obama team. city council member joan watson said yesterday, we voted for you and now give us a quid pro quo, why not? roll the tape. >> and our team in an overwhelmingly supported the reelection of this p
this issue. i would say that he should know more about economics. after certain points, the government raises less money by increasing the tax rate. if the tax rate were 100%, liz, how much money would the government raise? 100% of zero because nobody would go to work if the government confiscated everything. at some point, if the taxes increases and it turns out most analysis, most economists agree that that rate is about 30%. up to 30%, the government raises or money by having a tax of 30%. liz: you are a very large shareholder, if not the very largest, you are saving about $690,000 on your tax bill as well. that gives people a sense of how much money could possibly be saved. in 2015, will you start paying dividends again? >> i cannot decide. it is not just up to me. we will take a look at that and see what the story is. our goal is to reward shareholders. there are other ways to do that by buying shares back, increasing earnings per share, decreasing numbers of shares. we always will take care of our customers, that is what we do and that is why we are% successful. liz: thank you for comin
teaming with weapons that had been seized from the gadhafi government. it was a very dangerous brew. and there was also incidentally unclassified, open source of information. there had been a previous attack, a bomb exploded outside our benghazi mission, the british mission had been attacked, red cross mission. the british government closed its mission in benghazi. i haven't reached a conclusion but i worry that there was a lot of evidence that was not adequately responded to. >> do you think what susan rice said after the fact should be enough to prevent her from being nominated and successfully confirm ford secretary of state? >> i don't. i mean, i'm -- the question of who president obama nominates for secretary of state is obviously up to the president. that's a right he's earned by his re-election. but i have been over the intelligence, the talking points that were given to ambassador rice. i have read over her statements on television that sunday morning over and over again, i met with her, and the acting director of the c. ia, it seems to me that everything she said on those m
expect of our government, is honesty. so that we can, as the people being served, so we can judge the decisions being made. and jay carney, just so obstinate and arrogant really, in his replies and in his exarchals with the media over this. if i were a member of the media, being talked to and scolded as jay carney does to them, i would be quite offended and it would make me want to be an even better reporter and better investigator of what the facts truly are with this libya tragedy. >> the dirty little secret in washington, on both sides of the aisle, you will lose access -- you have to -- you have to use good judgment. i am not saying that you sell your soul on the administration -- >> so what? so what if you lose access to obama? you know why people-- the american people don't care if a reporter is not going to have access to the obama administration because what's coming back as a result of having that privileged, powerful access is this lack of transparency. it's more confusion. it's more uncertainty and it's lies! so why in the world would a reporter be concerned about getti
they want to and also, let's be real, because the government encourages through the tax code. it is reported in bloomberg in 2009 households with incomes of more than $200,000 claimed almost $60 billion in charitable deductions or 20% of total charitable giving in the u.s. that year. he goes on to site one study that found charitable donations are cut almost dollar for dollar to the increase in the donor's tax bill. so that could be a $60 billion cut to charity coffers. other studies said it could be half that though still likely in many billions of dollars of cuts to charities. that is the reality behind base broadening rate lowering tax reform. not magic. more of a magic trick that leads to a distraction to distract the audience from where the increases really are. but it is tax increase. on charitable giving, buying and state and local taxes. it is a an increase on marginal rates. that's a fair argument to have but is the argument we need to be having? joining me now to have some of that argument is chris hansen president of the american cancer society. the cancer action network. thank yo
's the bottom line. be straight with the people that's all we expect of our government. honesty. so we can as the people being served so we can judge the decisions being made. jay carney, just so objects it in and arrogant really in -- obstinate and arrogant in his replies and exchange with the media. if i were a member of the media being scolded as carney does i would be offended and would it make me want to be a better reporter and investigator of what the facts are with this libya tragedy. >> greta: dirty secret in washington on both sides of the aisle is access, you will lose access, you have to use good judgment. i'm not saying you sell your soul to the administration. >> so what if you lose access to obama. you know why people don't want to lose -- the american people don't care if a reporter isn't going to have access to the obama administration because what is coming back as a result of having that privilege powerful access. lack of transparency, more confusion, more uncertainy and lights. why in the world would a reporter be concerned about whether they are going to get more of th
government to write a big check to the state. we found with katrina, of the $140 billion, according to independent government auditors, there was rampant corruption and fraud and no bid contracts that went to cronies and we estimate that somewhere between 20 percent to 25 percent to 30 percent of the money was wasted on fraudulent contracts. it didn't helps victims. a lot of people got rich but it wasn't the people who lost their homes. >>neil: you can see money for a variety of purposes, the money coming in, helping the victims, helping sandy victims now, but it goes through a variety of nefarious purposes and could fill a hole in the budget. where is the backup to look at making sure this money is going for the pups to which it is intended? >>guest: this is the frustration as a taxpayer watch dog. going back to katrina we did not find out about a lot of this until a year or two years later and the american people had moved on and congress moved on so we didn't eleven any lessons. now we are about to make the same mistakes with respect to the clean up of sandy that we made when we
wisdom in, that argument for large government entities comin in, they provide the heft. you need heft, do you agree? >> you need heft, but it seems like right on the ground in the middle of this disaster, we're still relying on a 1950's style military response. drop a whole load of bulk stuff in one main area, and hope someone gets it but when you have people in a flood zone with no cars, with no power, no cell phones and no way to get information, have you the bulk hefty loads of stiff sitting in central locations, that people just cannot get to. and you need the community organizati to mobilize, go get it, and bring it to the community and startnocking on doors, that is what we've done at the guy and rescue center there is aouple other dozen organizations like ours, that have actually been the heart and soul of the distribution network th fed and clothes people up until now. to tell you, fema reps told me, we have people ringing doorbells they are not answers, i said they have no power, they are not hearing the doorbells, you have to knock on the door, and have a ighborhood present. nei
be expand in china and hire workers in china. >> when the government gives you money and attaches strings, you have to comply with the strings. when the government gives you money and is silent on something going to china you can go to china. bottom line, fm can spend the money in china. neil: if this was presented this was a possibility you think it would have been approved?ty, do you think it would have been approved? >> no, no, not by congress, and if approved by tim geithner, congress would have interceded. this is the third rail gm would use, i don't know if they are using federal dole a for gm to receive billions in taxpayer dollars or money borrowed in their name, loaned to the federal government to gm. neil: we broke all sorts of corporate law. bondholders. they move it back of the line. >> they broke, everything. >> would you pardon this phrase? they broke the law legally. meaning they persuade ad federal bankruptcy judge to disallow 200 years of precedent and twist and bend and torture statutes. the supreme court declined to get involved. i was with a member of the supreme court
Search Results 0 to 49 of about 135 (some duplicates have been removed)